Culminating an appreciation . . .

[Nelskie]

Now somebody quick lock the thread

Lock the thread? Now why would we do that? My guess is that there's a lot more members with great stories and insight regarding vintage / re-issue gear, and the influence its had on their playing / music.

I know we've already covered the issue of modeling in this section of the forum, but how can one not recognize the effect its had on players of all levels (not to mention economic status!) in regards to vintage tone? The Fender Cyber Champ was my first modeling amp, and it had an intensely profound effect on me as far as vintage tone / sound go. Up until that time, I only dreamed of having a whole arsenal of Fender amp sounds at my beckon call. I would also think that the whole amp modeling thing has opened up the idea of acquiring vintage gear to a lot of people, in that they hear how good a modeled sound is, and wonder . . . "hey, if the model sounds this good, imagine what the real thing sounds like!" Again, perception works its way into this equation, and purists like Mr. Fantastic over at Amptone.com will likely discount this theory. However, as we've seen right here on FN - - it does make for some lively discussion.

Another thing I'm seeing is that a lot of the newer artists / bands are reverting back to "old school" models / brands of gear - i.e. Stratocasters, Marshalls, Gibson Firebirds, etc. Yes, vanity and image may have a little to do with that, too. But I think its cool to see a hip new act like Jet crankin' out some wickedly loud licks with stacks of Hiwatts behind them. It also doesn't bother me in the least that they might be trying to cop some of The Who's thunder by doing so (face it, Pete Townshend put Hiwatt on the map.)

Perhaps the coolest "throwback" to vintage-era gear that I've seen recently is the venerable Epi Valve Jr. Yes, this little Class A firecracker has set the whole industry on its ear with its sassy retro style, and all-tube mojo. In fact, I'd almost have to say that it's the Fender Champ of a new generation of players. Best of all - - Epiphone is practically giving them away. I have a Jr. in each flavor - the combo and the head, and absolutely dig playing through both of them. For those of you who are new to this forum, I would absolutely recommend you check out the FN's #1 post (statistically speaking, that is), as well as duhvoodooman's fantastic Valve Jr. website. Here are those links:

http://www.thefret.net/showthread.php?t=74
http://duhvoodooman.com/VJr/VJr_mods.htm

The influence of vintage gear in modern day equipment is everywhere. All of which speak of the appreciation manufacturers have for it, as well as the timeless music it helped to create.

 

[oldguy]

Thank you, Nelskie. I do believe you've opened my eyes to something I hadn't really considered. As much as I love the old Super Reverb in the front room, I've always thought of it as a "one trick pony", meaning it has a great sound, the reverb and tremelo are wonderful, and it takes pedals well, but... it's not a Marshall...it's not a Hiwatt.
I guess modelers do open up a vast amount of possibilities to the average player, I know they've helped me get sounds I couldn't before, but... still...what if one could slowly but surely acquire the very gear that first inspired "rock" and "awww.." in their youth?
And here I go flip flopping yet again... if I could afford a vintage Paul, would the difference in it's PAF's and a new Paul w/ burstbuckers be that apparent to my ears? I really don't know, because, as I've said, I'm an average player. I don't like to think of myself as a paint-by-numbers guy, but I'm certainly no Picasso.
Very good thread, informative, and it makes you (or at least me) think.

 

[snarph]

well in the vain of appreciation of tone and classic and vintage gear there is some thing to be said about say an old dual showman an a les paul or stratocaster of the first runs,but in a world where you cant touch the stuff with out a bank roll . what can I say I like all that stuff and find it inspirational to the bone all the stuff from yester year really is musically the equivalent of the great works of art you learn about but just like those for the most part the only time you get to enjoy them is when some one else brings them out of their cloistered safe hideing places

 

[r_a_smith3530]

Rob - Thanks for sharing your story about "The Dog" & "Honeyboy Edwards", two of Chicago's most highly respected bluesmen. It really does underline the fact you don't need anything fancy gear-wise to make a musical connection. As a matter of fact, most of the blues heavies did it with a rigs that most of us wouldn't give a second thought to.

Now as viable and as truthful as the above statement is, isn't it about time we stop beating that horse? It seems to me that every time someone posts a thread on vintage gear it ultimately reverts back to that point. The original intent of my thread was to find out from our members what eventually led them to appreciating the various aspects vintage gear - whether it be its sound, music created by a popular band or artist, past ownership experiences, etc. Maybe I missed the crux of you response, and if I did, I apologize. From reading it, it seemed less about appreciating vintage gear, and more about not needing it.

On your point of tone coming from within - I would again agree with you. But then again, can you deny the fact that sometimes its the tone itself that inspires you? I, too, have owned plenty of different amplifiers, and quite honestly, all have paled in comparison to my '68 Fender Super Reverb. In my (23) years of playing up to the point when I bought it, I shared the same point of view as you and many others - - as in "what's the big fuss?" But when I did finally score my vintage amp, then I understood why players talked the way they did. Now that same type of playing experience might not hit you or anyone else the same way it did me - but I was literally astounded at the difference in tone. So much, in fact, that I now count it amongst the defining moments of my playing career.

All of which brings me to this point: Play whatever you like. Spend as much as you feel comfortable spending on gear. Enjoy your playing by whatever means makes it most accessible to you. Just be open to the fact that owning / playing vintage gear is an experience unto itself. If you never find yourself reaching that point in your own playing where you're wondering more about it, or perhaps even considering buying a vintage guitar / amp - - hey, that's great. More power to you.

But if / when you do get to a point where you're wondering about it - I will only tell you this. What awaits you is something that I cannot describe here in words. And if you're a guitar player who understands that, then you know exactly what I'm saying.

The "tone itself" most often frustrates me and challenges me in a way that my choice in gear cannot!

Some years back, before I took up the bass, I stopped trying to chase the sound of my guitar heroes. That has led, over the years, to some interesting equipment choices. If I were still playing guitar today (rather than bass) you could not have gotten me to trade my Peavey Classic 50/410 straight up for a silver face Twin Reverb. Frankly, I've played both, and I prefer the sound coming out of my Peavey. If I actively took up the six string again, I would seek out another.

In all this talk about "vintage" gear, I guess what bothers me is the implied notion that because it is vintage, that makes it somehow better. The notion that "owning / playing vintage gear is an experience unto itself" is where I get lost. I've plugged into my share of silver and black faced Fenders over the years, and although they were nice, I've never lost sleep wondering how I was going to be able to score one for myself. The same goes for guitars. Up until this past year, I owned a Leo-era (1983) G&L S500 (initialed "GF" in the pocket). It was Leo's first serious update to the Stratocaster. It had a phenomenal sound. Its predecessor had been a 1974 Les Paul Custom, a guitar considered as "vintage" today. Its sound was far less than phenomenal! My later, '84 Les Paul Studio was a far better quality guitar.

All that said, when I would grab for a guitar, my hand fell first not to the S500 or the Studio, but rather to my modded out '94 Peavey Reactor. Why? Because I liked its sound better. The combination of its Duncan Hot Lead and the PAF produce a sound that just blows me away. It truely is "an experience unto itself."

Today, I play through a Peavey Mk IV Series 400 bass head tied to a pair of SWR cabinets, not because that is all I can afford, but rather because it is what makes the sound I want to hear. I got to check it, and an Ashdown out at the same time, and the Ashdown did not impress me. The Peavey did.

If you like a piece of vintage gear because it sounds good, that's cool. Just remember, a Silvertone from the Sixties is just as vintage as your '62 Strat. And yes, like Honeyboy, I appreciate the tone he makes from his vintage '60s Silvertone!

In answer to your statement above, I appreciate the sound of an instrument because it sounds good, not because it has that certain name on its headstock or because it was made during a certain time period.

 

[tot_Ou_tard]

I don't really know what I can add to this thread basically for two reasons. The first is that I am a new player. It has now been exactly one year since I have picked up a guitar (or *any* instrument for that matter). Thus, although I have learned a huge amount (for example, I never heard of a humbucker or a single coil before about 14 months ago) I have not made any great transitions or had any revelatory moments about the sound that I am after.

The second reason is that my musical tastes have always been wide, deep, and broad and I have never had vintage/non vintage categories while listening to music, and I am not all that inclined to think in those terms while playing. There is no particular musician or band who changed my tastes nor who drives my pursuit of music. Yes, there are ones that I'll always love, but I always add new ones & I can't recall ever disliking music once I have grokked it.

I have, however, learned one thing that I'm sure that many of you realized long ago.

The rig tells you how it wants to sound & what to play.

This may be the key to the Gearosphere's incessant analysis.

If I get a interesting and enjoyable tone then I try to explore that.

Hey, I should learn a little chick'n pick'n! Or how 'bout some gritty blues, or something really clean and expansive?

I can imagine that changing gear would be a little like concept of reincarnation. The excitement of now being able to do something that you never could do before tinged with frustration about not being able to what you used to be able to do nearly as well.

In fact learning to play feels quite a bit like living life to me.

I think I'll have to wait for a future life to be any good

 

[Nelskie]

In all this talk about "vintage" gear, I guess what bothers me is the implied notion that because it is vintage, that makes it somehow better. The notion that "owning / playing vintage gear is an experience unto itself" is where I get lost. .

In answer to your statement above, I appreciate the sound of an instrument because it sounds good, not because it has that certain name on its headstock or because it was made during a certain time period.

My whole point of starting this particular thread was for people who are "into" the vintage thing to share some of their insights and experiences with others. As important and invaluable as I find the insights of our forum membership, I find it somewehat disconcerting that the the primary point of this thread is being overlooked. In no way am I seeking to undermine newer / non-vintage / entry-level gear, much less convert anyone else's opinions / perspectives to the ideals of vintage. While many of the points presented on this thread contrary my own are exceptionally valid, and well constructed - I do not subscribe to the idea that I am "implying" anything other than this: there are a lot of people who actually dig the vintage thing for what it is - something FUN that's directly associated with guitar playing.

Now that I've said that - - c'mon . . . really, is there anything wrong with one thinking that there's some sort of mystique built into gear made by yesteryear's craftsmen - even if there are no real physical or scientific explanations for it? Sure, people can say whatever they want about it, but mostly, perception is what lends value to any piece of equipment, vintage or non-vintage. And perception, as we all know, is entirely subjective, and uniquely individual. Guitar legends like Keith Richards, Eric Clapton, and Peter Frampton seem to think there's something to it, though, as they continue to employ vintage pieces in their playing performances to this very day. Right or wrong, I'd venture to say that their playing credentials aren't often lightly dismissed.

Another point I'd like to make invovles the pieces of gear r_a_ mentions in his post, both Peavey products. First, that the Classic / Delta series amps draw much of their technology from amps of decidedly vintage design (i.e. tube-based Fender Tweed amplifiers). And Peavey's Reactor guitar draws the majority of its styling cues from the Fender Telecaster design. Coincidence, you ask? Not likely. Besides making great equipment (nothing of which has anything to do with its affordability), the folks at Peavey are pretty sharp cookies.

I believe I've also mentioned that the vintage playing "experience" might not hit anyone else the same way it did me. Really people - nobody is trying to sell you a bill of goods here. Everybody's "experience" with vintage gear will undoubtedly differ, (again, using the term "experience" in the most general sense of the word.) Wave whatever flag you want. Each of us as a player has the opportunity to define the parameters of our tone, sound, and style as we see fit. As a matter of fact, most find that "experience" to be a big part of the fun factor of playing guitar - namely choosing your own path.

Hopefully, there's enough popcorn on the trail now.

 

[Justaguyin_nc]

Now that I've said that - - c'mon . . . really, is there anything wrong with one thinking that there's some sort of mystique built into gear made by yesteryear's craftsmen - even if there are no real physical or scientific explanations for it?

That about said it all... the Mystique.... to hold and own a piece of history.. for better or for worse.. the smell and feel of an old 50's 60's Fender.. knowing that this was exactly what Jimmy and Stevie etc etc held onto while we hear them screaming solos... we all wish for the majic.. to deny it is just a lie.. I do not know one from another when a reissue and original is in a picture and doubt very much I can tell the difference of the two being played by the same person.. but the awe of originals is there.. and can't be denied..

I recently got a pedal.. I had 3 choices.. The Rat (original), The Rat "Vintage" model or The Rat II... That being said... The Rat Original..well, is just that.. an Original from the time made and when the sounds became new.. expensive, if I went this way... so it was overlooked because well, The Rat Vintage model is the Exact same thing with parts and all.. same sound and feel..but less expensive do to it not being Original but still more pricey than the new model.. Todays version is called RatII which is different parts making it sound..well..different.. so it was out of the picture.. with all this said and done.. I have the pedal I can afford.. sounding exactly like the original..and I love it.. but ya know, its not the original and the mystique of the original still haunts me although my pocket book is not as much dented (actually the person who got it for me pocketbook)...

 

[r_a_smith3530]

Now that I've said that - - c'mon . . . really, is there anything wrong with one thinking that there's some sort of mystique built into gear made by yesteryear's craftsmen - even if there are no real physical or scientific explanations for it? Sure, people can say whatever they want about it, but mostly, perception is what lends value to any piece of equipment, vintage or non-vintage. And perception, as we all know, is entirely subjective, and uniquely individual. Guitar legends like Keith Richards, Eric Clapton, and Peter Frampton seem to think there's something to it, though, as they continue to employ vintage pieces in their playing performances to this very day. Right or wrong, I'd venture to say that their playing credentials aren't often lightly dismissed.

Another point I'd like to make invovles the pieces of gear r_a_ mentions in his post, both Peavey products. First, that the Classic / Delta series amps draw much of their technology from amps of decidedly vintage design (i.e. tube-based Fender Tweed amplifiers). And Peavey's Reactor guitar draws the majority of its styling cues from the Fender Telecaster design. Coincidence, you ask? Not likely. Besides making great equipment (nothing of which has anything to do with its affordability), the folks at Peavey are pretty sharp cookies.

I believe I've also mentioned that the vintage playing "experience" might not hit anyone else the same way it did me. Really people - nobody is trying to sell you a bill of goods here. Everybody's "experience" with vintage gear will undoubtedly differ, (again, using the term "experience" in the most general sense of the word.) Wave whatever flag you want. Each of us as a player has the opportunity to define the parameters of our tone, sound, and style as we see fit. As a matter of fact, most find that "experience" to be a big part of the fun factor of playing guitar - namely choosing your own path.

Hopefully, there's enough popcorn on the trail now.

Nelskie, here's where I am torn. It's that "mystique" thing I guess. Now, if you're talking Jimi's actual white Strat, pieced together and strung backwards, yes, that is special; it is sacred ground, so to speak. Same goes for "Blackie," Eric's beloved Strat, built from what he thought were the best parts of three guitars. I would have to say that Page's Standard Paul would also fit the bill, as would Jamerson's Precision or Jaco's Jazz Bass. Those are all special instruments, if for nothing else, their place in musical history. Now, does that make the Strat built a month after Jimi or Eric's special too? Not any more, I would believe, than the Washburn built a month after Dimebag Darrell's!

As a side note, Clapton himself has gotten over Blackie's "mystique" in case you hadn't noticed. ;-)

A common concept among those who make the Blues a way of life is the term "Mojo." An instrument that had travelled the length and breadth of the Delta, in the hands of a Robert Johnson, Son House, or Honeyboy Edwards, had survived countless nights of drunks in juke joints, and had all the scars to show it, was considered to have much "Mojo." The same could be said for the "battle scarred" Strat of Stevie Ray, or Jaco's Jazz, both of which had little of their original finish left on them. Those axe's have "Mojo" on them, in major amounts. For their owners, those instruments held a special place. Their owners had lovingly worn the finishes away, through countless hours of caress. Those instruments had travelled the length and breadth of the world, and they had survived all the abuse that a modern band could put out, be it in the world of Blues or Jazz.

Now, do you believe for a moment that a "relic" SRV or Jaco edition instrument is going to have that same Mojo or any special Mojo, because modern technological achievements have allowed technicians to create an instrument that mirrors the original, in appearance, to a tee? Or, do you believe that the Strat or Jazz Bass that was built right after Stevie's or Jaco's originals, and was then bought by your twice removed Uncle Phil, and stashed under his bed for twenty or more years also has that Mojo?

Now, of course, we all know that the whole town swore they saw the Emporer in all his new finery, except for one.

Me, I believe that the only Mojo in an instrument is that which the player puts into it, through living with that instrument, day in and day out, month after month, from year to year, and that Mojo only counts for the owner who "collected" that Mojo. That is why I don't take much stock in a '58 Les Paul Standard, especially when compared to a certain 1994 Peavey Reactor! I am just now starting to feel that Mojo building within my P-Bass. BTW, for the record, that Reactor is no more "vintage" than a comparable 1994 Fender Telecaster (discounting my numerous mods), and Peavey's design of the Classic Series amps took the sound of the '59 Bassman to a whole different level. Yes, it does have that vintage style (if you take the "Peavey" emblem off the grille cloth of a 50/410, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in a club at twenty feet away), but inside, it is a thoroughly modern valve amp, capable of things that the vintage original bassman could only dream of. Just imagine being able to play an original (or reissue/relic) '59 Bassman in the comfort of your bedroom, with no additional effects connected, and get that beautiful Fender-style distortion and vibe, with the volume pushed all the way to "2"!

I was at my local guitar store this evening, hanging with a couple of friends after my bass lesson, and checking out the gear. Buddy has a few interesting pieces on the walls and racks, an old ES175 here, an early Les Paul Jr. there, a mid-'60s Epihone here, a blue '67 Mustang there. He's also got an original silverface Twin Reverb with a whole bunch of someone's Mojo on it. I've at one point held or played each of these, and none of them inspired me any more than what has been in my own collection over the years.

Nelskie, I believe that you summed it up best when you said that the vintage experience might not hit someone else as it did you. I am glad for you that it hit you as you like it! Peace brother.

 

[Nelskie]

A fine response all across the board, r_a_. I, too, share the same appreciation for gear of the non-vintage flavour, as it's pretty much what I've played from day one. Even though I own a vintage Fender amp, I still find myself awestuck by the tone I get when I plug into one of my Valve Jr.'s, or the satisfying grind produced by my Classic 30. Yet, without those iconic tonal ambassadors of yesteryear (i.e. Fender Champs and Bassmans), there's a good chance neither of those amps would have ever been.

As a side note, Clapton himself has gotten over Blackie's "mystique" in case you hadn't noticed. ;-)

My guess is that it's the truck-loads of one-off signature models that the attentive staff at the Fender Custom Shop send his way . . . ya' think?!! Another thing along that same line that I found surprising was that EC had used several vintage Gibson models during the rehearsal sessions leading up to the Cream Reunion Tour, but decided to forego them altogether in favor of his stable of trusty Stratocasters. And to my knowledge, he didn't even play Strats while in Cream (*someone correct me if I'm wrong.) BTW - can anyone name the artist turned Eric on to the Stratocaster tone? (69SL will know this one.)

An instrument that had travelled the length and breadth of the Delta, in the hands of a Robert Johnson, Son House, or Honeyboy Edwards, had survived countless nights of drunks in juke joints, and had all the scars to show it, was considered to have much "Mojo." The same could be said for the "battle scarred" Strat of Stevie Ray, or Jaco's Jazz, both of which had little of their original finish left on them.

When I think of "battle scarred", the one player that comes to mind (besides SRV) is Rory Gallagher. I mean that Strat was absolutely pummeled. Yet, that one guitar's association with his sound is immeasurable.

Me, I believe that the only Mojo in an instrument is that which the player puts into it, through living with that instrument, day in and day out, month after month, from year to year, and that Mojo only counts for the owner who "collected" that Mojo.

You know, that in and of itself is a very interesting topic, and one that I think warrants its own thread. I don't know if I concur totally, but perhaps in the majority sense. An example that comes to mind is the Les Paul formerly owned by Peter Green, which is now owned and lovingly employed by one Mr. Gary Moore. I think Gary might probably tell you that he feels some of Peter's mojo each and every time he straps that guitar on, and belts out some killer blues licks. Mojo has many shapes and forms, not to mention that it resides in both gear, as well as playing technique. I wouldn't say that there's any real definitive answer to its existence, or an all-encompassing definition for it. It just is. And if / when you are fortunate enought to tap into it, even if it's just for a few seconds - you absolutely know it.

I was at my local guitar store this evening, hanging with a couple of friends after my bass lesson, and checking out the gear. Buddy has a few interesting pieces on the walls and racks, an old ES175 here, an early Les Paul Jr. there, a mid-'60s Epihone here, a blue '67 Mustang there. He's also got an original silverface Twin Reverb with a whole bunch of someone's Mojo on it. I've at one point held or played each of these, and none of them inspired me any more than what has been in my own collection over the years.

I don't think anyone would argue with you there, r_a_. Gear that I don't own, even if its killer vintage stuff, rarely inspires me the way that my own stuff does. However, park one of those beauties in your jam room for a month or two, perhaps you'd see it in a different light. I haven't had my Super Reverb but a handful of months, and it's already had a dramatic effect on my playing. Dare I say it, but a lot of classic and vintage gear comes standard with some type of mojo. Tapping into it is the real secret, but also, one of the most satisfying parts of the adventure. Like I've said many times before, as guitar players - we are all explorers. No two journeys are the same - or should be.

Nelskie, I believe that you summed it up best when you said that the vintage experience might not hit someone else as it did you. I am glad for you that it hit you as you like it! Peace brother.

Back at'cha, bro'! And I'll be looking for your "mojo" thread.

 

[r_a_smith3530]

Nelskie, you mentioned Rory Galagher in terms of "battle scarred" instruments, and another one came to mind, the Strat belonging to Bonnie Raitt. I've watched her Strat get more ratty and tattered looking with each successive album cover. Now, you can barely identify its former tobacco burst finish.

Yeah, it must be nice, being like Clapton, with a main line into the Fender Custom Shop! That main line may have something to do with why he didn't play any of those old Gibson's too! Exclusivity contract maybe? Also, you are quite correct, I don't recall ever seeing Eric with a Strat in the days of Cream or before.

I do believe Mr. Harrison (as in George) turned Eric on to the Strat. Eric payed him back with one of the six Strats he scored on a trip to the US. Three of those Strats went into becoming "Blackie."

Mojo? We'll work on that one!

Later,

 

[sunvalleylaw]

Nelskie, you mentioned Rory Galagher in terms of "battle scarred" instruments, and another one came to mind, the Strat belonging to Bonnie Raitt. I've watched her Strat get more ratty and tattered looking with each successive album cover. Now, you can barely identify its former tobacco burst finish.


Later,

Re: Bonnie, she blew me away with that thing, and her sig model blue one, when she played here this summer, outside at the base of the ski hill. She'd plant that left foot and just tear into the neck. I think my favorite was during the encore, when she yelled over after a slow song to "Bring me that old gold strat" or something like that. She definately seemed most comfortable with that guitar, playing her other one for different tunings.